The Daily Caller

The Daily Caller

1099 skirmish indicative of party ideologies

Photo of Chris Prandoni
Chris Prandoni
Federal Affairs Manager, ATR

Upon returning from recess, the Senate was captivated by two amendments to the small business lending bill. Passions flared not only because of the punitive impact each amendment would have, but because the legislation each side advocated for exemplified the ideological differences between Republicans and Democrats.

This proxy war was fought over the 1099 reporting requirements for small businesses that the Patient Protection and Affordability Care Act radically increases. While both Democrats and Republicans agree that 1099 reporting for all small businesses are unnecessary and burdensome, they have offered different remedies.

Representing the Democratic camp, Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) proposed a tax hike on America’s five largest oil and natural gas producers. Sen. Nelson would use the newly garnered revenue to exempt some small businesses from 1099 reporting.

In the GOP corner, Sen. Mike Johanns (R-Neb.) offered an amendment that eliminates the reporting requirements for all small businesses. To plug the fiscal hole created by exempting small businesses from onerous 1099 reporting, Sen. Johanns wants to cut $15 billion in government spending.

While neither amendment received enough support to pass, they are indicative of the ongoing debate between Republicans and Democrats. A rejuvenated Republican Party has pledged to cut spending and reduce the size and scope of government. The Democratic Party, seemingly incapable of trimming America’s $3.7 trillion annual budget, looks to tax America’s most productive businesses to pay for its policies.

The Nelson amendment would have repealed the Section 199 tax deduction for America’s five largest oil and natural gas producers. Enacted in 2004 to foster domestic job creation and economic growth, Section 199 allows companies to deduct a portion of the income that they derive from domestic production and manufacturing activities. Section 199 is not unique to oil and natural gas producers—as many opponents of the rule claim—any domestic manufacturer may employ this tax credit. Democrats have long been coveting the revenue a full repeal of Section 199 for energy companies would bring—Obama included the measure in his budget and Congressional Democrats often cite it as a way to pay for their programs.

The oil and natural gas industry directly or indirectly employs 9.2 million Americans and adds over a trillion dollars of wealth to the American economy each year. Further taxing oil and natural gas producers will only lead to higher energy prices and fewer jobs—neither result is desirable, especially during the current economic climate.

Instead of solving the self-induced 1099 problem created by rushing health care legislation through Congress, Democrats resorted to their default policy: raising taxes.

Conversely, Republicans offered a tough but necessary solution: reducing spending. No matter how hard Democrats in Congress try, it will be impossible to raise taxes enough to cover the amount of money they are spending.

  • senatormark4

    Johno413 could not be more correct. Both parties, members in good standing of “the Combine” [http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/15840.html ], work to buy votes and appease their largest donors. Your $25 donation is only used as a poll to see if they can get you to support the machine. The 1099 issue is something that speaks to any business person but it should attract the attention of all working Americans. It’s a FAIRNESS ISSUE. You sweat for a living as a wage slave and get your W-2. Invest or do business and you get to file or receive 1099-MISC. IRS Form 1099-G might be filed on you for accepting unemployment, ie. you used to work they want reporting. The largest share of government expenditures is UNreported. Entitlement spending for welfare, SNAP, section 8 housing should all receive an IRS Form 1099-GOV. Just because the government took our income, christened it “income, redistributed” does not mean we can’t force them to do the same reporting we ALLOW them to enforce against us. Simple. Fair. End of the Combine.

  • lollytyg

    This should have never been buried in the health bill, and we need to find out who added this clause. This is exactly why “We need to read it, before we vote for it.”
    The last thing in the world we need is another 20,000 IRS employees, computer power, buildings, and support to sustain this.
    Small businesses don’t need to 1099 Sam’s club, every year they buy more than 600 dollars worth of toner, paper, or pens… Multiply this by every supplier, every business, and for what? We have at least two pieces of paper documenting every purchase we make. Sometimes more if purchase orders are involved.
    This is government for government’s sake.
    Sen. Johanns is correct. Do away with this and don’t spend 15 billion dollars to start with on just more paperwork every year.

  • johno413

    I think many in the elected class from all sides ultimately know more about moving money around to garner votes than they do about sound financial management. Coupled with that is the near-concession of Dems to loss of certainly one, if not both houses, and everything they do right now is just reflexive. If they were to NOT vote for additional taxing it wouldn’t save them to any degree. And, so, by voting for taxing they can kick the can down the road a little and give the GOP and even bigger deficit. In the mean time their local honeypots are sweetened. In 2, 4, or 6 years, they’ll run on the empty honeypots, blaming the GOP.